Should He Stay or Should He Go

Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

Prediction based on nothing except a feeling that it makes sense is that Denver brings back Appert and RPI calls Gwozdecky.

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

Absolutely stunning. The program had been at best mediocre since Armstrong until Gwozdecky came aboard. In his first year, they made the tourney after a nine-year absence; later on, they won two national championships; for the past few years, the team has been performing at the kind of level that most ADs would probably dream about, the NCAA disappointments notwithstanding. Honestly, the only comparables would be Michigan firing Berenson, or Minnesota firing Lucia after keeping Wooger on for so many years.

Come to think of it, why did BU keep that Parker guy around for so long? What an idiot he was. Not enough Natties!

Scersk '97

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

Absolutely stunning. The program had been at best mediocre since Armstrong until Gwozdecky came aboard. In his first year, they made the tourney after a nine-year absence; later on, they won two national championships; for the past few years, the team has been performing at the kind of level that most ADs would probably dream about, the NCAA disappointments notwithstanding. Honestly, the only comparables would be Michigan firing Berenson, or Minnesota firing Lucia after keeping Wooger on for so many years.

Come to think of it, why did BU keep that Parker guy around for so long? What an idiot he was. Not enough Natties!

Isn't losing to Yale, from the EZAC, a firable offense?

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

What makes you think he can or is willing to try and recruit the different type of student we get at CU vs DU? That is always the problem that I see. I think it's far easier to go from non-scholarship school to scholarship factory, than the other way around.

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

Why would Gwozdecky want to caoch at Cornell? He has no connection to the school. He's never coached in a no-scholarship, high academic requirements environment. Why would you think he'd want to take on that challenge?

He's also 59 years old. So he's not likely to be a guy who would stick around for a generation.

Not to mention that Denver has pretty much played a similar defense first style of hockey. Why would you think Gwoz would be so much more successful at Cornell, given the constraints we have to work with?

Scersk '97

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

Absolutely stunning. The program had been at best mediocre since Armstrong until Gwozdecky came aboard. In his first year, they made the tourney after a nine-year absence; later on, they won two national championships; for the past few years, the team has been performing at the kind of level that most ADs would probably dream about, the NCAA disappointments notwithstanding. Honestly, the only comparables would be Michigan firing Berenson, or Minnesota firing Lucia after keeping Wooger on for so many years.

Come to think of it, why did BU keep that Parker guy around for so long? What an idiot he was. Not enough Natties!

There is speculation (though maybe just by people grasping for an explanation) that a dispute over Gwozdecky's salary was involved. Take secondhand speculation for what it's worth, though, of course.

KeithK

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

Why would Gwozdecky want to caoch at Cornell? He has no connection to the school. He's never coached in a no-scholarship, high academic requirements environment. Why would you think he'd want to take on that challenge?

He's also 59 years old. So he's not likely to be a guy who would stick around for a generation.

Not to mention that Denver has pretty much played a similar defense first style of hockey. Why would you think Gwoz would be so much more successful at Cornell, given the constraints we have to work with?

I beat you, I beat you....You did elaborate however.

Jim Hyla

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

What makes you think he can or is willing to try and recruit the different type of student we get at CU vs DU? That is always the problem that I see. I think it's far easier to go from non-scholarship school to scholarship factory, than the other way around.

Willing to try that's easy. He's unemployed and he's said he wants to continue to coach. Two who's the best player Schafer has produced? Murray? Easiy take Matt Carle over that.

Tangent: I find it unnecessarily confusing that there's both a George Gwozdecky and a Guy Gadowsky.

Of course you would. But, Douglas was drafted in the 8th round of the NHL draft and Matt was taken in the 2nd round. Also, we have no way of knowing if Matt Carle could even have met the academic standards at Cornell. Gwozdecky doesn't get to just turn Cornell into Denver, as several other people have said.

css228
Two who's the best player Schafer has produced? Murray? Easiy take Matt Carle over that.

I might go with Matt Moulson now. I never would have thought that in 2006. And despite eyebrow power, it pains me to say this because he's on the freakin' *Islanders*.

Sigh. At least he doesn't play for the Devils.

Kyle Rose

css228
Two who's the best player Schafer has produced? Murray? Easiy take Matt Carle over that.

I might go with Matt Moulson now. I never would have thought that in 2006. And despite eyebrow power, it pains me to say this because he's on the freakin' *Islanders*.

Sigh. At least he doesn't play for the Devils.

Still would take a legitimate top pair defenseman over Matt Moulson, who's just lucky he plays on a line with Taveres.

css228

Kyle Rose

css228
Two who's the best player Schafer has produced? Murray? Easiy take Matt Carle over that.

I might go with Matt Moulson now. I never would have thought that in 2006. And despite eyebrow power, it pains me to say this because he's on the freakin' *Islanders*.

Sigh. At least he doesn't play for the Devils.

Still would take a legitimate top pair defenseman over Matt Moulson, who's just lucky he plays on a line with Taveres.

I love Murray, but I think calling him a top pair defenseman is maybe a bit generous.

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

For my money, UConn might be the best fit. They don't have a coach, he gets a year to get his ducks in a row, then rolls on to HEA with low expectations. They will throw money at him to make a splash in HEA and don't have academic constraints like Harvard or to a lesser extent RPI. And Connecticut is the new hub of college hockey apparently.

Josh '99
Tangent: I find it unnecessarily confusing that there's both a George Gwozdecky and a Guy Gadowsky.

This!

Josh '99

css228

Kyle Rose

css228
Two who's the best player Schafer has produced? Murray? Easiy take Matt Carle over that.

I might go with Matt Moulson now. I never would have thought that in 2006. And despite eyebrow power, it pains me to say this because he's on the freakin' *Islanders*.

Sigh. At least he doesn't play for the Devils.

Still would take a legitimate top pair defenseman over Matt Moulson, who's just lucky he plays on a line with Taveres.

I love Murray, but I think calling him a top pair defenseman is maybe a bit generous.

Talking about Carle, not Murray.

css228

Josh '99

css228

Kyle Rose

css228
Two who's the best player Schafer has produced? Murray? Easiy take Matt Carle over that.

I might go with Matt Moulson now. I never would have thought that in 2006. And despite eyebrow power, it pains me to say this because he's on the freakin' *Islanders*.

Sigh. At least he doesn't play for the Devils.

Still would take a legitimate top pair defenseman over Matt Moulson, who's just lucky he plays on a line with Taveres.

I love Murray, but I think calling him a top pair defenseman is maybe a bit generous.

Talking about Carle, not Murray.

Oops, misunderstood. Sorry about that.

Chris '03

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

For my money, UConn might be the best fit. They don't have a coach, he gets a year to get his ducks in a row, then rolls on to HEA with low expectations. They will throw money at him to make a splash in HEA and don't have academic constraints like Harvard or to a lesser extent RPI. And Connecticut is the new hub of college hockey apparently.

I'd be sorry if I didn't post this granade that cause a flurry of activity today:

My last thought watching this press conference ... Someone call Harvard

— Adam Wodon (@CHN_AdamWodon) April 2, 2013

Crap. I reeeeeally hope not.

Also, I was about to say "go to Penn State, it's a scholarship school with money that you can turn into a big-time program."

Then I went to find out who their coach was.

Awesome.

"George Gwozdecky replaces Guy Gadowsky; Penn State Players Participate in Press Conference at Pegula Ice Arena"

Put me down for he should stay, FWIW.

Colgate would be a decent fit for Gwozdecky, if Don Vaughan is getting tired. But consider this: Vaughan, who has been around seemingly forever, is younger than Gwozdecky.

This is not a guy to build a new program; it's a guy who might be able to take a program one last step, before retiring after a few years.

Trotsky
Colgate would be a decent fit for Gwozdecky, if Don Vaughan is getting tired. But consider this: Vaughan, who has been around seemingly forever, is younger than Gwozdecky.

This is not a guy to build a new program; it's a guy who might be able to take a program one last step, before retiring after a few years.

This post is a couple days late . Today's the third.

marty

Trotsky
Colgate would be a decent fit for Gwozdecky, if Don Vaughan is getting tired. But consider this: Vaughan, who has been around seemingly forever, is younger than Gwozdecky.

This is not a guy to build a new program; it's a guy who might be able to take a program one last step, before retiring after a few years.

This post is a couple days late . Today's the third.

?

(Oh, you probably mean the contradiction between the two paragraphs. Well, yeah, they were two distinct thoughts that probably didn't belong in the same post.)

css228
Willing to try that's easy. He's unemployed and he's said he wants to continue to coach. Two who's the best player Schafer has produced? Murray? Easiy take Matt Carle over that.

Best college player during his tenure, probably, unless you want to pick Lenny. But I think that Greening and Moulson will go down as better pros.

Murray's teammates seem to love him and think he makes a great contribution. I think oddly enough we may underestimate his impact in the pros, like many underestimated Manderville, because from a star in college he went to a role player in the NHL. But I think his tenure speaks volumes -- most pro careers only last a couple years.

I'm gonna give my usual short answer to this question, when it comes up each year ... and sorry if this offends anyone, but I really don't think it deserves anything more than this ...

--> If you think Mike Schafer should be fired, you are a complete idiot

I am pleased to see that the best, most eloquent, replies on this thread come from the people I personally know - They have a lot more patience than I have for this line of thinking.

Since it directly applies, here is the commentary I just wrote on the Gwozdecky firing:
[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Otherwise, the tangents in which this thread went on, are interesting. As an Islanders fans, I must stick up for the notion that you don't have to attend every game, watch every game, and/or have season tickets to be considered a "true fan." I hate that kind of thinking. I care about the Islanders deeply, all the time. But whether it's the Islanders or any of the other crappy teams that I love -- if they are miserable, I can't justify paying all that money to attend games, or invest time that I could be spending with my kids or significant other doing any number of other things. In fact, particularly in pro sports, I think it sends a very bad message to ownership when people continue to show up to games win or lose. See: Chicago Cubs. There is no incentive for those teams to improve.

The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans. When they've had even a little success over the last 20 years, the building was packed and loud. They are out there. And I don't blame them one bit for being fed up with how that franchise has been for 20 years. A complete joke in many ways - hopefully soon to be on the rebound.

That said - there are, obviously, also people who are band-wagoners and only care when a team wins. I loathe them. That's a different story - but the only way to distinguish between the two is to talk to them, not necessarily by whether they attend a game or not.

Trotsky

marty

Trotsky
Colgate would be a decent fit for Gwozdecky, if Don Vaughan is getting tired. But consider this: Vaughan, who has been around seemingly forever, is younger than Gwozdecky.

This is not a guy to build a new program; it's a guy who might be able to take a program one last step, before retiring after a few years.

This post is a couple days late . Today's the third.

?

(Oh, you probably mean the contradiction between the two paragraphs. Well, yeah, they were two distinct thoughts that probably didn't belong in the same post.)

I meant it would have been more appropriate on April 1. I don't see Gwozdecky in Hamilton, NY.

marty

Trotsky

marty

Trotsky
Colgate would be a decent fit for Gwozdecky, if Don Vaughan is getting tired. But consider this: Vaughan, who has been around seemingly forever, is younger than Gwozdecky.

This is not a guy to build a new program; it's a guy who might be able to take a program one last step, before retiring after a few years.

This post is a couple days late . Today's the third.

?

(Oh, you probably mean the contradiction between the two paragraphs. Well, yeah, they were two distinct thoughts that probably didn't belong in the same post.)

I meant it would have been more appropriate on April 1. I don't see Gwozdecky in Hamilton, NY.

Would you care to elaborate?

adamw
Since it directly applies, here is the commentary I just wrote on the Gwozdecky firing:
[www.collegehockeynews.com]

My favorite bit from your piece: "But the cutthroat, winning-is-the-only thing mentality has infiltrated college hockey as it has other big-time college sports." The older I get the more I understand that winning is fun but it's the journey that makes sports fun.

KeithK

adamw
Since it directly applies, here is the commentary I just wrote on the Gwozdecky firing:
[www.collegehockeynews.com]

My favorite bit from your piece: "But the cutthroat, winning-is-the-only thing mentality has infiltrated college hockey as it has other big-time college sports." The older I get the more I understand that winning is fun but it's the journey that makes sports fun.

Are we paying coaches for journeys? If so, Schafer had better be leading Senior Week rafting trips.

Trotsky

marty

Trotsky

marty

Trotsky
Colgate would be a decent fit for Gwozdecky, if Don Vaughan is getting tired. But consider this: Vaughan, who has been around seemingly forever, is younger than Gwozdecky.

This is not a guy to build a new program; it's a guy who might be able to take a program one last step, before retiring after a few years.

This post is a couple days late . Today's the third.

?

(Oh, you probably mean the contradiction between the two paragraphs. Well, yeah, they were two distinct thoughts that probably didn't belong in the same post.)

I meant it would have been more appropriate on April 1. I don't see Gwozdecky in Hamilton, NY.

Would you care to elaborate?

Sorry, just a bad joke I guess on my part, but it would seem like an April fools joke to see him in Starr.

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

I expected at least one Mausoleum reference. Traid!

Trotsky

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

I expected at least one Mausoleum reference. Traid!

To their credit, they are actually remedying that. Leaving Nassau County: not just for the cool kids anymore!

Josh '99

Trotsky

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

I expected at least one Mausoleum reference. Traid!

To their credit, they are actually remedying that. Leaving Nassau County: not just for the cool kids anymore!

I like that the map on our crest does not reach far enough west to show the location of the new building. It's part of our strategy to confuse the opposition.

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

20 sellouts in 2002 - only time in the last 20 years they had an actual decent team

adamw

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

20 sellouts in 2002 - only time in the last 20 years they had an actual decent team

We were decent in 2007, too. 40-42 ignoring Bettman Bullshit, just 2 games worse than 2002. Gotta go all the way back to 1993 and real records (40-37-7) for the next glimmer.

Trotsky

adamw

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

20 sellouts in 2002 - only time in the last 20 years they had an actual decent team

We were decent in 2007, too. 40-42 ignoring Bettman Bullshit, just 2 games worse than 2002. Gotta go all the way back to 1993 and real records (40-37-7) for the next glimmer.

40-42 and an 8 seed is not what I meant by decent .... they snuck in the playoffs in 2003 and 2004 too, which were equally useless years. But yeah.

adamw

Trotsky

adamw

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

20 sellouts in 2002 - only time in the last 20 years they had an actual decent team

We were decent in 2007, too. 40-42 ignoring Bettman Bullshit, just 2 games worse than 2002. Gotta go all the way back to 1993 and real records (40-37-7) for the next glimmer.

40-42 and an 8 seed is not what I meant by decent .... they snuck in the playoffs in 2003 and 2004 too, which were equally useless years. But yeah.

It seemed decent at the time. Relative deprivation -- Marx was right. (Don't tell Keith.)

Ben

KeithK

adamw
Since it directly applies, here is the commentary I just wrote on the Gwozdecky firing:
[www.collegehockeynews.com]

My favorite bit from your piece: "But the cutthroat, winning-is-the-only thing mentality has infiltrated college hockey as it has other big-time college sports." The older I get the more I understand that winning is fun but it's the journey that makes sports fun.

Are we paying coaches for journeys? If so, Schafer had better be leading Senior Week rafting trips.

Actually, Cornell does pay coaches for things other than wins and championships. Historically, the AD has been willing to keep coaches with frankly terrible records around provided they were under contract and running the program the right way. In light of this, think about the facts of Schafer's current position:

1) Whatever the naysayers claim, his record is incredible. Cornell has been the class of the ECAC and Ivy League for most of the last 15 years, and has been nationally competitive at a level of consistency few teams achieve. That's a hell of an accomplishment from a W/L perspective. Even if you only consider 5 year windows, Cornell was pretty damn good prior to this season, and only an eyelash behind Yale and Union in terms of overall record and post-season accomplishments in the 5 years ending in 2012. The team is quite a bit further behind Yale and Union over the 5 seasons ending in 2013, but this amounts to 1 rebuilding year and 1 bad season (and this was a bad season - let's not sugar-coat it). That's hardly the sign of a massive decline. Even in the go go years of the 70s Cornell wasn't *always* the best - or even the second-best - team in the league. Not over a 10-15 year window.

2) Under Schafer's watch this team has had more news about humanitarian and senior CLASS award finalists than even minor scandals regarding off-ice behavior. That doesn't mean these guys are all angels, but it's at least a sign of a clean, disciplined program. If that trend continues, and assuming Schafer still enforces class attendance and academic performance the way he used to, it'll take more than a couple of .500 seasons for the AD to make a change.

3) According to something I read around here Schafer has ~4 years left on his contract. Given points 1 and 2 Cornell would be insane to fire him during that term. Even if this year is finally the start of the kind of decline the "Fire Schafer" crowd has been carping about around here for the past 6 years, they won't fire him. They'll simply decide to part ways at the end of the contract term, and split as amicably as possible.

Barring a major scandal, Schafer isn't getting fired any time soon. At this stage I think I have sufficient perspective to realize that this is as it should be. Feel free to disagree and focus solely on the record in these conversations, but remember - Cornell athletics is, at least to all appearances, about more than just winning.

adamw
I'm gonna give my usual short answer to this question, when it comes up each year ... and sorry if this offends anyone, but I really don't think it deserves anything more than this ...

--> If you think Mike Schafer should be fired, you are a complete idiot

Damn you, Adam!! I hate it when you beat around the bush!!

I am not on the "Fire Schafer" side of things. Yes, I am disappointed each year when they are eliminated and fall short of an NCAA title. But, under Schafer, each year begins with real hope that a title is within reach THAT SEASON!! That's good enough for me. I can recall some of the pre-Schafer teams where there was no hope. That's when it's time to change coaches!

One other thing to keep in mind ... high turnover of assistants. Cornell is still regrouping after losing Brent Brekke, Jamie Russell, Scott Garrow and Casey Jones in short order. New guys are less experienced, or at least less experienced in Cornell's ways.

redice

adamw
I'm gonna give my usual short answer to this question, when it comes up each year ... and sorry if this offends anyone, but I really don't think it deserves anything more than this ...

--> If you think Mike Schafer should be fired, you are a complete idiot

Damn you, Adam!! I hate it when you beat around the bush!!

One of my favorite things about this forum is no matter how blunt I am there's always somebody who makes me look tactful.

adamw
One other thing to keep in mind ... high turnover of assistants. Cornell is still regrouping after losing Brent Brekke, Jamie Russell, Scott Garrow and Casey Jones in short order. New guys are less experienced, or at least less experienced in Cornell's ways.

While it could matter, it's been two years. If the change in assistants had a lot to do with it, it probably would have shown up last year.

We may have "escaped" a big discontinuity because the arrival of the new guys coincided with the arrival of a big class.

I found the seniors' lack of leadership... disturbing. That may have just been the mix of personalities, or you may have hit it with a disagreement between the assistant coaching style of the first two years and the latter two. If so, then we should expect an improvement since 5 of the net 6 returning years of all classes (seniors' 3, juniors' 2, etc...) will now have been spent under the same staff.

Tom Lento

Ben
Are we paying coaches for journeys? If so, Schafer had better be leading Senior Week rafting trips.

Actually, Cornell does pay coaches for things other than wins and championships. Historically, the AD has been willing to keep coaches with frankly terrible records around provided they were under contract and running the program the right way. In light of this, think about the facts of Schafer's current position:

1) Whatever the naysayers claim, his record is incredible. Cornell has been the class of the ECAC and Ivy League for most of the last 15 years, and has been nationally competitive at a level of consistency few teams achieve. That's a hell of an accomplishment from a W/L perspective. Even if you only consider 5 year windows, Cornell was pretty damn good prior to this season, and only an eyelash behind Yale and Union in terms of overall record and post-season accomplishments in the 5 years ending in 2012. The team is quite a bit further behind Yale and Union over the 5 seasons ending in 2013, but this amounts to 1 rebuilding year and 1 bad season (and this was a bad season - let's not sugar-coat it). That's hardly the sign of a massive decline. Even in the go go years of the 70s Cornell wasn't *always* the best - or even the second-best - team in the league. Not over a 10-15 year window.

2) Under Schafer's watch this team has had more news about humanitarian and senior CLASS award finalists than even minor scandals regarding off-ice behavior. That doesn't mean these guys are all angels, but it's at least a sign of a clean, disciplined program. If that trend continues, and assuming Schafer still enforces class attendance and academic performance the way he used to, it'll take more than a couple of .500 seasons for the AD to make a change.

3) According to something I read around here Schafer has ~4 years left on his contract. Given points 1 and 2 Cornell would be insane to fire him during that term. Even if this year is finally the start of the kind of decline the "Fire Schafer" crowd has been carping about around here for the past 6 years, they won't fire him. They'll simply decide to part ways at the end of the contract term, and split as amicably as possible.

Barring a major scandal, Schafer isn't getting fired any time soon. At this stage I think I have sufficient perspective to realize that this is as it should be. Feel free to disagree and focus solely on the record in these conversations, but remember - Cornell athletics is, at least to all appearances, about more than just winning.

That's not the point. Coaches are not paid for a "journey." They are paid to win games and titles. They are also representatives of the university/team/club and have obligations to represent that entity in a responsible way. This is not a comment on whether or not Schafer should be behind the bench in October, I addressed that on the first page of this thread. It's about how coaches are evaluated. If you want to talk about how coaches ought to be evaluated, that is a different discussion.

Ben
That's not the point. Coaches are not paid for a "journey." They are paid to win games and titles. They are also representatives of the university/team/club and have obligations to represent that entity in a responsible way. This is not a comment on whether or not Schafer should be behind the bench in October, I addressed that on the first page of this thread. It's about how coaches are evaluated. If you want to talk about how coaches ought to be evaluated, that is a different discussion.

The "journey" bit was a reference to how fans should approach watching sports. It's related to how programs/coaches should be viewed, since ultimately fan interest drives the commercial success of teams, but not the same. Poor juxtaposition on my point. (A paragraph break might have helped.)

Ben

KeithK

adamw
Since it directly applies, here is the commentary I just wrote on the Gwozdecky firing:
[www.collegehockeynews.com]

My favorite bit from your piece: "But the cutthroat, winning-is-the-only thing mentality has infiltrated college hockey as it has other big-time college sports." The older I get the more I understand that winning is fun but it's the journey that makes sports fun.

Are we paying coaches for journeys? If so, Schafer had better be leading Senior Week rafting trips.

I do give Ben points for the comeback. It is an interesting image.

KeithK

Ben
That's not the point. Coaches are not paid for a "journey." They are paid to win games and titles. They are also representatives of the university/team/club and have obligations to represent that entity in a responsible way. This is not a comment on whether or not Schafer should be behind the bench in October, I addressed that on the first page of this thread. It's about how coaches are evaluated. If you want to talk about how coaches ought to be evaluated, that is a different discussion.

The "journey" bit was a reference to how fans should approach watching sports. It's related to how programs/coaches should be viewed, since ultimately fan interest drives the commercial success of teams, but not the same. Poor juxtaposition on my point. (A paragraph break might have helped.)

I agree on our side of the boards, but in terms of the way in which results are achieved, I'm reminded of something De Gaulle wrote:

The result having been attained, everything that had preceded it and led to it was proclaimed glorious and reasonable.

As a fan, it's great to see your team win a game coming back from 3-0 down, but an excellent coach makes sure his team doesn't have to dig themselves out of that hole.

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky

adamw

Josh '99

adamw
The Islanders have been miserable for 20 years. I defend the fact that their attendance is lousy. The forthcoming jokes from Josh notwithstanding, there are a lot of Islanders fans.

... said 1985.

(OK, it's not great, but it's tough when you're put on the spot like that!)

20 sellouts in 2002 - only time in the last 20 years they had an actual decent team

We were decent in 2007, too. 40-42 ignoring Bettman Bullshit, just 2 games worse than 2002. Gotta go all the way back to 1993 and real records (40-37-7) for the next glimmer.

40-42 and an 8 seed is not what I meant by decent .... they snuck in the playoffs in 2003 and 2004 too, which were equally useless years. But yeah.

It seemed decent at the time. Relative deprivation -- Marx was right. (Don't tell Keith.)

Maybe


this will help. And the Islanders have a chance to pull off something similar 20 years later.

Ben

Tom Lento

Ben
Are we paying coaches for journeys? If so, Schafer had better be leading Senior Week rafting trips.

Actually, Cornell does pay coaches for things other than wins and championships. Historically, the AD has been willing to keep coaches with frankly terrible records around provided they were under contract and running the program the right way. In light of this, think about the facts of Schafer's current position:

1) Whatever the naysayers claim, his record is incredible. Cornell has been the class of the ECAC and Ivy League for most of the last 15 years, and has been nationally competitive at a level of consistency few teams achieve. That's a hell of an accomplishment from a W/L perspective. Even if you only consider 5 year windows, Cornell was pretty damn good prior to this season, and only an eyelash behind Yale and Union in terms of overall record and post-season accomplishments in the 5 years ending in 2012. The team is quite a bit further behind Yale and Union over the 5 seasons ending in 2013, but this amounts to 1 rebuilding year and 1 bad season (and this was a bad season - let's not sugar-coat it). That's hardly the sign of a massive decline. Even in the go go years of the 70s Cornell wasn't *always* the best - or even the second-best - team in the league. Not over a 10-15 year window.

2) Under Schafer's watch this team has had more news about humanitarian and senior CLASS award finalists than even minor scandals regarding off-ice behavior. That doesn't mean these guys are all angels, but it's at least a sign of a clean, disciplined program. If that trend continues, and assuming Schafer still enforces class attendance and academic performance the way he used to, it'll take more than a couple of .500 seasons for the AD to make a change.

3) According to something I read around here Schafer has ~4 years left on his contract. Given points 1 and 2 Cornell would be insane to fire him during that term. Even if this year is finally the start of the kind of decline the "Fire Schafer" crowd has been carping about around here for the past 6 years, they won't fire him. They'll simply decide to part ways at the end of the contract term, and split as amicably as possible.

Barring a major scandal, Schafer isn't getting fired any time soon. At this stage I think I have sufficient perspective to realize that this is as it should be. Feel free to disagree and focus solely on the record in these conversations, but remember - Cornell athletics is, at least to all appearances, about more than just winning.

That's not the point. Coaches are not paid for a "journey." They are paid to win games and titles. They are also representatives of the university/team/club and have obligations to represent that entity in a responsible way. This is not a comment on whether or not Schafer should be behind the bench in October, I addressed that on the first page of this thread. It's about how coaches are evaluated. If you want to talk about how coaches ought to be evaluated, that is a different discussion.

Keith didn't respond back about this, so I will. No one ever said that I keep my mouth shut.

I hope, and I do think, that in the Ivy League coaches are paid to do more than win games. Winning is an important thing, but it's not the only thing. And sometimes those other things can trump a less than stellar record. I'm OK with that, and all the things that have been said about the direction of the program should allow for some slack. We don't know the specifics of the Denver situation, but their history has some similarities to ours.

Murry Armstrong was a contemporary of Ned Harkness. He stayed around longer, leaving in 1977, but after he left the program was floundering till Gwozdecky came along. He brought it back to national promenance and now they fired him. If it was because he didn't win recent NCAA games, shame on them. If we were to do the same, then shame on us.

Yes, I know the Denver program was more successful than CU has been, but that's to be expected. Anyone who thinks otherwise, well to quote Adam, they're an idiot. If we were to fire Schafer over this year, or even persieved trend, I know I'd quit contributing. Denver is not us and we should never be them.

I'm glad to see so many defenses of Schafer on this thread. I sincerely hope he doesn't read eLynah, and I'm glad that if he does he'll see people coming to his defense. (Not that he should care what a bunch of people on the internet say)

The idea of firing him is ridiculous. It's really, really absurd. One bad year.

FF 2002. One game away from the FF in 2005, 2006, 2009, 2012.

An alumnus coach with strong ties to the community. More Cornellians in the NHL than any time in history. Consistently good news about CLASS award finalists, teddy bear tosses, and the like, and never any news about scandals.

Ridiculous.

Jim Hyla
Keith didn't respond back about this, so I will. No one ever said that I keep my mouth shut.

I thought Tom wrote a better response then the one I started to write. Yours was better too. So I'll just second what Tom and Jim said.

BMac
The idea of firing him is ridiculous. It's really, really absurd. One bad year.

The idea of firing Schafer is mostly an emotional response to a disappointing, frustrating year. It's really not that different from me kicking my car door after a really tough loss. (Plastic doors FTW!) Not exactly laudable, but understandable.

KeithK

BMac
The idea of firing him is ridiculous. It's really, really absurd. One bad year.

The idea of firing Schafer is mostly an emotional response to a disappointing, frustrating year. It's really not that different from me kicking my car door after a really tough loss. (Plastic doors FTW!) Not exactly laudable, but understandable.

But nobody says you're a bad fan if you don't assault your vehicle.

Door-kicking is false hustle.

BMac
FF 2002. One game away from the FF in 2005, 2006, 2009, 2012.

You mean, FF 2003. One game away in '02, '06, '09, '12 and 1997!

Scersk '97

BMac
FF 2002. One game away from the FF in 2005, 2006, 2009, 2012.

You mean, FF 2003. One game away in '02, '06, '09, '12 and 1997!

And '05.

Scersk '97

BMac
FF 2002. One game away from the FF in 2005, 2006, 2009, 2012.

You mean, FF 2003. One game away in '02, '06, '09, '12 and 1997!

'05 too.... damned gophers.

Chris '03

Scersk '97

BMac
FF 2002. One game away from the FF in 2005, 2006, 2009, 2012.

You mean, FF 2003. One game away in '02, '06, '09, '12 and 1997!

'05 too.... damned gophers.

A typo, of course, made in my haste to get to '97.

Ben

KeithK

Ben
That's not the point. Coaches are not paid for a "journey." They are paid to win games and titles. They are also representatives of the university/team/club and have obligations to represent that entity in a responsible way. This is not a comment on whether or not Schafer should be behind the bench in October, I addressed that on the first page of this thread. It's about how coaches are evaluated. If you want to talk about how coaches ought to be evaluated, that is a different discussion.

The "journey" bit was a reference to how fans should approach watching sports. It's related to how programs/coaches should be viewed, since ultimately fan interest drives the commercial success of teams, but not the same. Poor juxtaposition on my point. (A paragraph break might have helped.)

I agree on our side of the boards, but in terms of the way in which results are achieved, I'm reminded of something De Gaulle wrote:

The result having been attained, everything that had preceded it and led to it was proclaimed glorious and reasonable.

As a fan, it's great to see your team win a game coming back from 3-0 down, but an excellent coach makes sure his team doesn't have to dig themselves out of that hole.

Union might disagree after seeing what Peca did to them in Providence on Sunday.

Jim Hyla
Yes, I know the Denver program was more successful than CU has been, but that's to be expected. Anyone who thinks otherwise, well to quote Adam, they're an idiot. If we were to fire Schafer over this year, or even persieved trend, I know I'd quit contributing. Denver is not us and we should never be them.

Please do not imply that I said this when I quite plainly did not.

If the primary responsibility of a coach is not to win games, what should we base our assessment of coaches upon? As soon as colleges and universities began to hire coaches and formalize athletic competition, they set up a situation in which winning games was (and still is) the primary objective of sports teams. If I had my way, Cornell would take a stand against the corruption of college athletics, end all of its varsity programs, and focus on developing its student body though academics and extracurriculars, including intramural and club sports. No recruiting, no paid coaches. If someone wants to attend Cornell to study Philosophy or HBHS or MechEng, and also would like to play sports, they would be able to do so at the club or intramural level.

Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

Ben

Jim Hyla
Yes, I know the Denver program was more successful than CU has been, but that's to be expected. Anyone who thinks otherwise, well to quote Adam, they're an idiot. If we were to fire Schafer over this year, or even persieved trend, I know I'd quit contributing. Denver is not us and we should never be them.

Please do not imply that I said this when I quite plainly did not.

If the primary responsibility of a coach is not to win games, what should we base our assessment of coaches upon? As soon as colleges and universities began to hire coaches and formalize athletic competition, they set up a situation in which winning games is the primary objective of sports teams. If I had my way, Cornell would take a stand against the corruption of college athletics, close down all of its varsity programs, and focus on developing its student body though academics and extracurriculars, including intramural and club sports. No recruiting, no paid coaches. If someone wants to attend Cornell to study Philosophy or HBHS or MechEng, and also would like to play sports, they would be able to do so at the club or intramural level.

Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

I didn't mean to imply that you had said anything about Denver. I put that in to head off anyone from starting that discussion. Sorry.

I might agree the primary responsibility is to win, but I was agreeing with Keith that they are not paid to just win, at least in the Ivies. Since you only mentioned winning, I wanted to expand upon it. Now that you have expanded further, I couldn't agree more.

Jim Hyla

Ben

Jim Hyla
Yes, I know the Denver program was more successful than CU has been, but that's to be expected. Anyone who thinks otherwise, well to quote Adam, they're an idiot. If we were to fire Schafer over this year, or even persieved trend, I know I'd quit contributing. Denver is not us and we should never be them.

Please do not imply that I said this when I quite plainly did not.

If the primary responsibility of a coach is not to win games, what should we base our assessment of coaches upon? As soon as colleges and universities began to hire coaches and formalize athletic competition, they set up a situation in which winning games is the primary objective of sports teams. If I had my way, Cornell would take a stand against the corruption of college athletics, close down all of its varsity programs, and focus on developing its student body though academics and extracurriculars, including intramural and club sports. No recruiting, no paid coaches. If someone wants to attend Cornell to study Philosophy or HBHS or MechEng, and also would like to play sports, they would be able to do so at the club or intramural level.

Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

I didn't mean to imply that you had said anything about Denver. I put that in to head off anyone from starting that discussion. Sorry.

I might agree the primary responsibility is to win, but I was agreeing with Keith that they are not paid to just win, at least in the Ivies. Since you only mentioned winning, I wanted to expand upon it. Now that you have expanded further, I couldn't agree more.

I think I misplaced the bolded section. The implication I was getting from what you wrote (the last two sentences) was that I want Schafer to be fired, which is what I was objecting to. Sorry for the confusion.

Ben

Jim Hyla

Ben

Jim Hyla
Yes, I know the Denver program was more successful than CU has been, but that's to be expected. Anyone who thinks otherwise, well to quote Adam, they're an idiot. If we were to fire Schafer over this year, or even persieved trend, I know I'd quit contributing. Denver is not us and we should never be them.

Please do not imply that I said this when I quite plainly did not.

If the primary responsibility of a coach is not to win games, what should we base our assessment of coaches upon? As soon as colleges and universities began to hire coaches and formalize athletic competition, they set up a situation in which winning games is the primary objective of sports teams. If I had my way, Cornell would take a stand against the corruption of college athletics, close down all of its varsity programs, and focus on developing its student body though academics and extracurriculars, including intramural and club sports. No recruiting, no paid coaches. If someone wants to attend Cornell to study Philosophy or HBHS or MechEng, and also would like to play sports, they would be able to do so at the club or intramural level.

Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

I didn't mean to imply that you had said anything about Denver. I put that in to head off anyone from starting that discussion. Sorry.

I might agree the primary responsibility is to win, but I was agreeing with Keith that they are not paid to just win, at least in the Ivies. Since you only mentioned winning, I wanted to expand upon it. Now that you have expanded further, I couldn't agree more.

I think I misplaced the bolded section. The implication I was getting from what you wrote (the last two sentences) was that I want Schafer to be fired, which is what I was objecting to. Sorry for the confusion.

No, I wouldn't have meant to try and imply that, either. It's one of the problems wih digital communication, when you respond to one thing and then expand, no one really knows what is reply and what is new. In person, you would have just said, wait, wait, that's not what I meant.

I'm waiting for someone to start on "I couldn't agree more." As soon as I left the office to drive home, I said to myself, I probably took the thread on a whole new drift.

Ben
Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose. Or just the simple pleasure of watching a good hockey game. Would I prefer Cornell to win? Of course. But it's far from the end-all-be-all.

KeithK
For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose. Or just the simple pleasure of watching a good hockey game. Would I prefer Cornell to win? Of course. But it's far from the end-all-be-all.

Very well said. Comraderie and the thrill of watching us compete, often at a very high level.

Jim Hyla

Ben

Jim Hyla

Ben

Jim Hyla
I love you

I love you too

You're the best

NO YOU ARE

NO YOU!!!

BRO HUG!!!!!!

BMac

Jim Hyla

Ben

Jim Hyla

Ben

Jim Hyla
I love you

I love you too

You're the best

NO YOU ARE

NO YOU!!!

BRO HUG!!!!!!

Now stop that will you!

KeithK

Ben
Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose.

Meeting my wife.

Beeeej

KeithK

Ben
Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose.

Meeting my wife.

First date with my wife, with dinner at Little Joe's --I knew how to show a lady a good time!

Beeeej

KeithK

Ben
Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose.

Meeting my wife.

Met my wife, actually our first date, at a Cornell NCAA regional game. Gwen's dorm-mates thought it was incredibly romantic. I thought: two birds, one stone.

billhoward

Beeeej

KeithK

Ben
Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose.

Meeting my wife.

Met my wife, actually our first date, at a Cornell NCAA regional game. Gwen's dorm-mates thought it was incredibly romantic. I thought: two birds, one stone.

I can see it now: Come to Lynah Rink! Watch some hockey, get married!

KeithK

billhoward

Beeeej

KeithK

Ben
Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose.

Meeting my wife.

Met my wife, actually our first date, at a Cornell NCAA regional game. Gwen's dorm-mates thought it was incredibly romantic. I thought: two birds, one stone.

I can see it now: Come to Lynah Rink! Watch some hockey, get married!

I met my late wife while on the faculty at SU, my first job after finishing graduate school at Cornell. At first, Jan thought that I was also dating someone else, because I didn’t ask her out on some weekends. For years after we were married, she told friends that she knew I was really serious about her when I got a second season ticket.

After her death in 2006, I memorialized those seats in section B.

Denver looking even more brilliant.

Ben

Tom Lento

Ben
Are we paying coaches for journeys? If so, Schafer had better be leading Senior Week rafting trips.

Actually, Cornell does pay coaches for things other than wins and championships. Historically, the AD has been willing to keep coaches with frankly terrible records around provided they were under contract and running the program the right way. In light of this, think about the facts of Schafer's current position:

1) Whatever the naysayers claim, his record is incredible. Cornell has been the class of the ECAC and Ivy League for most of the last 15 years, and has been nationally competitive at a level of consistency few teams achieve. That's a hell of an accomplishment from a W/L perspective. Even if you only consider 5 year windows, Cornell was pretty damn good prior to this season, and only an eyelash behind Yale and Union in terms of overall record and post-season accomplishments in the 5 years ending in 2012. The team is quite a bit further behind Yale and Union over the 5 seasons ending in 2013, but this amounts to 1 rebuilding year and 1 bad season (and this was a bad season - let's not sugar-coat it). That's hardly the sign of a massive decline. Even in the go go years of the 70s Cornell wasn't *always* the best - or even the second-best - team in the league. Not over a 10-15 year window.

2) Under Schafer's watch this team has had more news about humanitarian and senior CLASS award finalists than even minor scandals regarding off-ice behavior. That doesn't mean these guys are all angels, but it's at least a sign of a clean, disciplined program. If that trend continues, and assuming Schafer still enforces class attendance and academic performance the way he used to, it'll take more than a couple of .500 seasons for the AD to make a change.

3) According to something I read around here Schafer has ~4 years left on his contract. Given points 1 and 2 Cornell would be insane to fire him during that term. Even if this year is finally the start of the kind of decline the "Fire Schafer" crowd has been carping about around here for the past 6 years, they won't fire him. They'll simply decide to part ways at the end of the contract term, and split as amicably as possible.

Barring a major scandal, Schafer isn't getting fired any time soon. At this stage I think I have sufficient perspective to realize that this is as it should be. Feel free to disagree and focus solely on the record in these conversations, but remember - Cornell athletics is, at least to all appearances, about more than just winning.

That's not the point. Coaches are not paid for a "journey." They are paid to win games and titles. They are also representatives of the university/team/club and have obligations to represent that entity in a responsible way. This is not a comment on whether or not Schafer should be behind the bench in October, I addressed that on the first page of this thread. It's about how coaches are evaluated. If you want to talk about how coaches ought to be evaluated, that is a different discussion.

I get the feeling you didn't actually read my post. My entire point was that coaches at Cornell are paid for more than just wins and titles, and the way they (and their teams) represent the organization are a more important part of how they're evaluated than you seem to believe. It's not just Cornell, either, it happens around the Ivy League, and you can see this if you look at the coaching histories of their hockey teams. The most obvious example is Allain's predecessor at Yale, Tim Taylor, who was the head coach for 30 years (with 2 seasons off to coach in the Olympics) and widely regarded as a classy guy and an excellent representative of Yale and its athletic program. Taylor's record over his 28 seasons at Yale was 342-433-55, with 11 seasons over .500, just 3 seasons with 20+ wins, 1 1st place finish, 1 NCAA appearance (first-round loss), and 0 league championships.

To put it another way, if Cornell has 2 more 15-16-3 seasons I'd still expect Schafer to have his job at least until his contract runs out, because by all accounts he does well across *all* of the other dimensions (the academic and community service records of his team, alumni relations, administrative work, etc.). Whether or not that gets him an extension beyond the last year of his contract is an unknown, and the only thing that would surprise me with 2 more mediocre seasons is a really long or lucrative extension. 3 consecutive nearly-.500 seasons is actually unprecedented in the modern (ECAC) era of Cornell men's hockey. The only coach with 3 straight losing seasons is Brian McCutcheon, and two of those years were dreadful (14 wins *combined*).

Trotsky
Denver looking even more brilliant.

Coach with two national titles in the past decade bounced, top prospect leaves. Maybe Bill Tierney can coach two sports.

George64

KeithK

billhoward

Beeeej

KeithK

Ben
Given that the university will not do this, and the financial and personal investment I and others (including the university) make in Cornell sports, I want our sports teams to win games and titles -- I want a return on my investment. That comes in the form of on-field success (without off-field unpleasantness).

For me, return on investment is all of the memorable experiences I have had watching and xperiencing Cornell hockey. Winning titles is a part of that. But so is the heartbreak of losing in Buffalo or that horrible day trip to Placid in '98. Road tripping to the North Country or taking over Bright, win or lose.

Meeting my wife.

Met my wife, actually our first date, at a Cornell NCAA regional game. Gwen's dorm-mates thought it was incredibly romantic. I thought: two birds, one stone.

I can see it now: Come to Lynah Rink! Watch some hockey, get married!

I met my late wife while on the faculty at SU, my first job after finishing graduate school at Cornell. At first, Jan thought that I was also dating someone else, because I didn’t ask her out on some weekends. For years after we were married, she told friends that she knew I was really serious about her when I got a second season ticket.

After her death in 2006, I memorialized those seats in section B.

Where is the smiley for :lump in throat: ?

+2

Ken Schott reports that Union coach Bennett gets contract extension.

I’ve been fortunate enough to get the job about 30 minutes after Nate had left, and to my loyalty, too, to this program to not be out looking for other jobs when I am 100 percent comfortable at Union College.

“I don’t have any desire to go anywhere else. I’m extremely happy here.”

So, he's not available.

Jim Hyla
Ken Schott reports that Union coach Bennett gets contract extension.

I’ve been fortunate enough to get the job about 30 minutes after Nate had left, and to my loyalty, too, to this program to not be out looking for other jobs when I am 100 percent comfortable at Union College.

“I don’t have any desire to go anywhere else. I’m extremely happy here.”

So, he's not available.

Who knows? Ask Steve Alford.

Jim Hyla
Ken Schott reports that Union coach Bennett gets contract extension.

I don't understand this. Last year, Union finished first in the ECAC, won 26 games overall, and made the Frozen Four. This year they finished fourth, won only 22 games, and finished a game short of the Frozen Four -- losing to an ECAC team yet. Why give this guy yet another extension when the team is clearly in a death spiral??

(Tongue firmly in cheek, in case you couldn't tell)

Give My Regards

Jim Hyla
Ken Schott reports that Union coach Bennett gets contract extension.

I don't understand this. Last year, Union finished first in the ECAC, won 26 games overall, and made the Frozen Four. This year they finished fourth, won only 22 games, and finished a game short of the Frozen Four -- losing to an ECAC team yet. Why give this guy yet another extension when the team is clearly in a death spiral??

FYP

Ben

As a fan, it's great to see your team win a game coming back from 3-0 down, but an excellent coach makes sure his team doesn't have to dig themselves out of that hole.

News flash. Motzko no longer considered excellent.

Hear, hear.

yale wins...... wow there is another way.

Guys. we are in a rut, good coach, but time to move on. Yale, Tim Taylor gone + national championship and it f'ing, kills me. cowbell bell guy and ithaca girl lit into me last year on the chat site for saying we were a mess, and then we did a near frozen four, so i shut up, but we are a boring team. I cant watch us anymore. time for a change

marty

Ben

As a fan, it's great to see your team win a game coming back from 3-0 down, but an excellent coach makes sure his team doesn't have to dig themselves out of that hole.

News flash. Motzko no longer considered excellent.

Ditto Pecknold. Time to replace him, too.

marty

marty

Ben

As a fan, it's great to see your team win a game coming back from 3-0 down, but an excellent coach makes sure his team doesn't have to dig themselves out of that hole.

News flash. Motzko no longer considered excellent.

Ditto Pecknold. Time to replace him, too.

Way to not get the point at all.

As one can see I am new to this forum. However I have followed Cornell hockey for the last few years and now have a more vested interest due to my son coming there in a few years. The suggestions that Coach Schafer should be replaced is just plan off the planet. Obviously wins and losses are now becoming paramount to a coaches success but what other qualities does he bring to the program. Yes this was not the greatest year for the Big Red,but they hit a rut, no one quit the compete level was still there and they worked their way back to get within one game of A.C. Last I had checked before this game Yale was 0-3 against Q. Coach Alain made a change and got the win. Coach Schafer will get this back on track and I do firmly believe that this next season will be special.

Really, I cant wait for next year....

A few points relating to this entire thread:
1) As fans, I don't think we are entitled to anything, even if you are a donor directly to the hockey program.
2) Mike Schafer has brought us many wonderful moments guiding the Cornell hockey progam.
3) Mike Schafer is well aware of this year's shortcomings and will work his darndest to produce positive change
4) There's not a lot of difference between being a champ and being a disappointment. If either BU or Michigan win their final game, Yale doesn't even make the tournament. They would have given away what looked like a sure playoff spot and played terribly in Altantic City. If Eric Axell doesn't break his stick on the opening faceoff of the 3rd period vs. Ferris State last year, which led seconds later to their winning goal. who knows what might have happened.
5) This isn't pro sports. It's Cornell hockey and I'll always love it.

jkahn
A few points relating to this entire thread:
1) As fans, I don't think we are entitled to anything, even if you are a donor directly to the hockey program.
2) Mike Schafer has brought us many wonderful moments guiding the Cornell hockey progam.
3) Mike Schafer is well aware of this year's shortcomings and will work his darndest to produce positive change
4) There's not a lot of difference between being a champ and being a disappointment. If either BU or Michigan win their final game, Yale doesn't even make the tournament. They would have given away what looked like a sure playoff spot and played terribly in Altantic City. If Eric Axell doesn't break his stick on the opening faceoff of the 3rd period vs. Ferris State last year, which led seconds later to their winning goal. who knows what might have happened.
5) This isn't pro sports. It's Cornell hockey and I'll always love it.

Well said!

Agree ! Looking forward to next October already! LGR

Amen. Especially the part that Schafer is aware of what needs to be addressed next season.

billhoward
Amen. Especially the part that Schafer is aware of what needs to be addressed next season.

As are the assistants, and you don't want the following on your resume: "hired by a perennial contender who promptly fell apart." Even before Mike, those guys' necks are in the noose. They have to have us improve, quickly, for them to advance in their profession.

jkahn
A few points relating to this entire thread:
1) As fans, I don't think we are entitled to anything, even if you are a donor directly to the hockey program.
2) Mike Schafer has brought us many wonderful moments guiding the Cornell hockey progam.
3) Mike Schafer is well aware of this year's shortcomings and will work his darndest to produce positive change
4) There's not a lot of difference between being a champ and being a disappointment. If either BU or Michigan win their final game, Yale doesn't even make the tournament. They would have given away what looked like a sure playoff spot and played terribly in Altantic City. If Eric Axell doesn't break his stick on the opening faceoff of the 3rd period vs. Ferris State last year, which led seconds later to their winning goal. who knows what might have happened.
5) This isn't pro sports. It's Cornell hockey and I'll always love it.

+1

Trotsky

billhoward
Amen. Especially the part that Schafer is aware of what needs to be addressed next season.

As are the assistants, and you don't want the following on your resume: "hired by a perennial contender who promptly fell apart." Even before Mike, those guys' necks are in the noose. They have to have us improve, quickly, for them to advance in their profession.

And don't forget that a team of Ben Syer's recruits was the best team in college hockey during the regular season and was the runner-up in the NCAA Tournament.

Chris '03

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

For my money, UConn might be the best fit. They don't have a coach, he gets a year to get his ducks in a row, then rolls on to HEA with low expectations. They will throw money at him to make a splash in HEA and don't have academic constraints like Harvard or to a lesser extent RPI. And Connecticut is the new hub of college hockey apparently.

Sources say George Gwozdecky, fired by Denver after 19 years, is currently in intense discussions to become next head hockey coach at UCONN

— John Buccigross (@Buccigross) May 2, 2013

RichH

Chris '03

css228

cbuckser
Bringing this back on topic (but at risk of breaking the united front), as I watch George Gwozdecky's press conference, I am further convinced of the inanity of firing Mike Schafer. Unrealistic expectations yield atrocious decisions.

I'm actually on the Fire Schafer, hire Gwozdecky bandwagon. I wouldn't fire Schafer without a coach I thought of as an an improvement, but lo and behold...

For my money, UConn might be the best fit. They don't have a coach, he gets a year to get his ducks in a row, then rolls on to HEA with low expectations. They will throw money at him to make a splash in HEA and don't have academic constraints like Harvard or to a lesser extent RPI. And Connecticut is the new hub of college hockey apparently.

Sources say George Gwozdecky, fired by Denver after 19 years, is currently in intense discussions to become next head hockey coach at UCONN

— John Buccigross (@Buccigross) May 2, 2013

Not just any discussions, INTENSE discussions.

Josh '99
Not just any discussions, INTENSE discussions.